In the first section we certainly set up for our self an important exercise –in addition we came up with a new almost an incomprehensible new hundred year old hypothesis pertaining to—time dimension –rather more so we set up to define –time`s internal medium—its nature. However there is an important question that seems to be a most logical one. Why does –time—break forth from the system`s —center point? This a thought provoking question. A serious problem is present here which is manifold as —no instrument, nor books, nor theories, nor any hypothesis, nor any thing seems to displace us from this seemingly state of almost a –state of a vacuum within our understanding regarding this.



There is enough information in the universe. We may be going in many different directions for a long time because this does not seem to be –a single one point solution Between two stars there are billions and billions kilometer, and there are trillions or more stars in the universe . Coming up with hypothesis and theories regarding their motion, manifestations and mechanism of action is an enormous undertaking. What actually is the motivational force that moves all these infinite number of worlds?
In the previous sections—time—viewed from the exterior was described as a— point—but till it was illustrated as —an expanding sphere—there within this there appeared, due to motion/action—a string like dimension. This dimension at this point —is still a hypothesis, because the hypothetical motion that exists within that touches/pierces/penetrates the – actual time momentum—which is non- material but virtual— as seen from a material view point. Our concept lies in the material. Time in this theory is non-material—and science has not spent much time in deciphering nor understanding its existential concepts of this cardinal question . 



We shall try to solve what is actually the —time source/ or time sources—
1. Let us presuppose that there are some kind of time source/s .
2. How many could be existing in the Universe?
3. Are they multiples—is there a constant number?
4. Where is the beginning of time? 
5. Is the present a single place/many places? 
6. Perhaps there is –no present/or its is everywhere?



1—What would a –time dimension source – be like?
There are two possibilities—(a) either it is so large that we do not see it/can`t observe it (b) it is far too small to bee seen or detected (c) or both. To our present mind this idea incomprehensible however it is still conceivable. Think of the paradox of the black hole. Containing an enormous compacted mass—probably material of numerous stars and other such material, yet theoretically it has—singularity— a single point/dot— in its entirety.
Many eastern philosophies believe in the existence of two natural eternal/ancient forces that govern everything in existence— KI and Chi. These are the mechanism that stimulate the—awakening process— the source is infinitesimal, its expansion unfathomable, but not endless.


The—points in geometry and physics which are used today are – more structurally engineered and —static . This point of view cannot be used to define –the construction of the world. There needs to be established a theory which is a –dynamic point of view, an actual dynamic ‘punctiform physical point—and that which is not really a point’. This is a paradox. 
It should be a –point but should have certain dynamic characteristics. From the initial start these characteristics—have to be present.
Below are the essential importance of creation —without these it is impossible to explain an intelligent world view—they are:
1. Existence 2. Expansion 3. Rotation
It seems illigical that we move from the more complex towards the more simple. The—sphere—seems the most perfect and the most simple form. It can be –data quantifiable—like the circle with its beams/rays. This single data reveals everything about a sphere. 



But how large could the beam of a sphere be? Maybe—any size—big or small ?Let`s suppose the smallest sphere to be the –a dot. Let this be the marginal case (point)of the beam of the sphere. (F.Viktor theory) with this then the dot—is still a sphere and still has a beam—and may have an conceivable sized beam—being infinitesimally small.
However if the beam becomes—zero –then the sphere does not have a separate—internal surface just an external one. And because this is a punctiform sphere—its external surface will be also—zero . 
There would be a necessity for a— 1 dimensional returning flow/ or streaming—on the tiny sphere itself , that which had started on its— northern pole—and floods the surface of the sphere increasingly—then from below its equator becomes increasingly limited as it narrows –arriving as dot on its —south pole.



If the sphere is pierced through for the south pole to the north pole—the flow will close down. This is a better theory than the previous one—these vortex forms –are often found in medieval art illustrations. A vortex like this may be simple or complicated—it is dependent on whether it is from the generation of –two, three or more frequencies.

The above example is a good example of a comparison This is only a plain topography here. The above top point and the lower point—may be reached in various manner. 
The way to imagine this complex plane— is to place a sphere onto this plane. The sphere touches the plane—it touches/contacts at one point—as it stands on it. Where they touch—this meeting place on the plane—the actual spot—will be their mutual/common origin. The spheres north pole—its upper area/ top, shall be— infinity. If all projector lines ( a laser beam) is set off from here –the sphere shall be pierced through—at a certain point on the plane. 

F. Viktor stated—Every point on the top of the sphere is—endless/infinite. It expands in every direction
F. Viktor supplement –Let`s take a complex ‘number’ plane—on top—a complex ‘number’ sphere. The lowest point of the complex ‘number’ point is—zero—the upper point is –multidirectional infinity—it is endless. The –zero is only ‘place’ like—a way, does not occupy a region—infinity however is ‘not place like’, but a region. When the two are compressed together—we get a zero internal beam torus (Bindu)—whose midpoint has a number with full value. Thus the Bindu`s every single point is a –complex number. Its center, by virtue of its special situation is—the observer point. 
There is not one single characteristic within the observer point—which however is present (the characteristics) in all of the other points, which is called –trend. In other words—it may not have inherited a trend from the zero—since zero has no direction. Though from the –infinite point—it inherits its –multi-directionalism. That is then means that —the present expands / spreads in all direction. 

This becomes impossible once it starts to point in an outward direction. On the north pole—we can, while standing shine a lazer beam in a downward direction—however when this is done in a horizontal position—it is no longer able to have the piercing capacity. If this is the case—how can we use this theory in our—view point regarding the hypothesis that everything is dynamic?
F. Viktor point here is very valid. Infinity just falls above –zero point within our sphere. If zero is an even number —then it is logical that infinity can only be an —odd number. -8, -6, -4, -2 , 0, +2, +4, +6, +8—the prior numbers are simply an example as to why the –zero is even. F. Viktor`s justification is crucial and extremely important. 


Perhaps, in reality—infinity is a circle? Or a lemiszkata?
Then the point –that defines infinity –we shall draw(pull) it in, into one single point with the zero. What emerges? Something that resembles the former—a surface that is a sphere which is formed from drawing two of the opposite points of the sphere together. This is a toroidal body that revolves. Nothing else than a lemniszkáta turning round along on an axis. What is in actuality is—the manifestation or sign of –the infinite/endless—in a constructing motion/or mode. 

The below illustration graphic states the theory visually –it starts from one point from a circular area and evolves thus—into the picture seen here.